1. Field of the Invention
The present invention relates generally to information services and, more particularly, to a method, computer useable medium, and/or system for analyzing media exposure.
2. Description of the Related Art
There are many factors that can drive album sales, such as hit development, image and artist visibility, consumer buzz, touring, the residual equity of a marquee artist, feature film exposure, etc. However, time has proven that hit development is the most common and efficient technique for creating music product demand. As a result, record companies compete fiercely to promote their content to key national and major market media outlets, and gain the exposure necessary to drive demand for album sales and airplay chart (e.g., Billboard, R&R, etc.) activity.
The music industry generally utilizes a tricky “hit” or “miss” technique where promotional music or video content is provided to mass media outlets, typically radio stations and music video channels. Unlike most business models in which a company exercises a high level of control over the mass media exposure for its products through advertising buys and other marketing directives, the music business model necessitates a blanketing of appropriate mass media outlets with this promotional content in the hopes that the media outlets will utilize the promotional content as part of their programming. The process of developing a “hit” from promotional content is both an art and a science as record companies promote the promotional content to media outlets in order to gain the repeated exposure necessary (“spins”) to drive demand for bulk album sales. Spins are tracked for the major market media outlets by a number of companies, including Broadcast Data Systems (a division of Nielsen Entertainment) and MediaBase (a division of Music Information Systems). Record promoters who speak with media outlet programmers on a regular basis can also track spins, although the quality of this information may be less accurate.
Major market media outlets and “chart reporters” are always the primary promotional focus of record companies. Their impact on album sales is much easier to identify and on which to capitalize. Record companies generally have limited marketing resources and focus promotional and marketing efforts where they think they can achieve the highest level of album sales. In addition, because most of these major market media outlets are chart reporters, they affect the positive movement of songs on the airplay charts.
Positive airplay chart activity stimulates additional airplay exposure at secondary and tertiary media outlets who generally use the published airplay charts as guides for programming decisions. Secondary and tertiary media outlets continue to be mostly ignored because the media exposure created by them has typically been difficult for record companies to gauge and exploit.
Because music purchases are generally based upon an emotional response of some sort, there is no guarantee of how well consumers will react to the media exposure of promotional material. Album sales are the primary means by which record companies currently derive income. Record companies do not receive royalties from the airing of promotional material, so it is critical that they have product distributed adequately to retail locations in areas where there is adequate exposure.
An accurate initial allocation is critical on new albums with anticipated initial orders of 25,000 units or less. In today's music business environment, a bad initial allocation can miss potential sales, damage an artist's credibility, and be difficult to correct without a subsequent major “hit”.
At the retail level, record companies compete through price and positioning programs. This is similar to competition in many other industries, except that there is usually only a short window of opportunity created by mass media exposure in which pricing/positioning programs need to be timed in order to achieve maximum sell-through. It is key for record companies, especially those with developing hits and artists, to have a strong distribution arm that is able to get product into the appropriate locations during this window of opportunity.
For product distribution, record companies generally operate on a “push” distribution philosophy where large quantities of music product are shipped into the distribution channel once promotional efforts to media outlets are well under way. It is assumed that the distributors and retailers are capable of placing the product in the correct retail outlets to capitalize on the current media exposure. For albums shipping hundreds of thousands (or millions of albums) this philosophy works fairly well because of widespread demand and the quantity of product in the distribution pipeline. But for the niche and developing artists shipping, for instance, 25,000 or less units into the marketplace (the vast majority of releases), this philosophy can result in inaccurate product coverage, especially if the title is not a priority for the label or distribution company. This can result in lost sales and stale inventory when the various windows of active media exposure are missed. In the music industry, stale inventory units (called “returns”) are ultimately sent back to the record companies for a refund, and are viewed as an outstanding liability.
One of the other distribution options is for the record company to work in tight conjunction with its distributor and customers to micro market music product according to exposure factors and place the product in locations that represent the best potential for demand. By placing product in locations that represent the best potential for demand, the ability to capitalize on media exposure is maximized, and the risk of returns can be minimized. However, this process has always been labor and time-intensive, and difficult to achieve adequately beyond specific exposure situations or a small handful of markets at a time.
Artist touring is also a time-proven method of stimulating demand for music product. The principle is the same for taking advantage of potentially increased demand—place artist music product in retail locations that best represent the sales potential of the music product due their proximity to a personal appearance venue.
When developing a music product distribution plan, the residual equity of an artist is also a factor to consider. The music industry generally places special emphasis on key high sales markets or markets where the artist has developed a fan base through previous radio airplay and/or touring exposure. Historical market-by-market sales trend data is usually available from either a past distributor or a music product data service such as Nielsen SoundScan.
A need exists to provide a method, computer useable medium, and/or system for analyzing media exposure to assist product development teams in focusing their sales and marketing efforts on key areas of market exposure, to help management entities make informed decisions on how and where to allocate sales and marketing budgets, and to help maximize the ability to capitalize on promotional exposure.
The related art is represented by the following references of interest.
U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2002/0066358 A1, published on Jun. 6, 2002 for Yutaka Hasegawa et al., describes a method, system, and recording medium for viewing/listening evaluation of musical performance. The Hasegawa et al. application does not suggest a method, computer useable medium, and/or system for analyzing media exposure according to the claimed invention.
U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2002/0120501 A1, published on Aug. 29, 2002 for Christopher N. Bell et al., describes a system and method for measuring, evaluating, and reporting audience response to audio, video, and other content. The Bell et al. application does not suggest a method, computer useable medium, and/or system for analyzing media exposure according to the claimed invention.
U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2002/0123924 A1, published on Sep. 5, 2002 for Benjamin G. Cruz, describes a method for gathering local demand data for entertainment performances. The Cruz application does not suggest a method, computer useable medium, and/or system for analyzing media exposure according to the claimed invention.
U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2002/0124077 A1, published on Sep. 5, 2002 for Clarke R. Hill et al., describes a traffic authentication method and related computer-implemented software that provide authenticated-information about audio or video program traffic transmitted over a computer network from a media server. The Hill et al. application does not suggest a method, computer useable medium, and/or system for analyzing media exposure according to the claimed invention.
U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2002/0124246 A1, published on Sep. 5, 2002 for David L. Kaminsky et al., describes methods, systems, and program products for tracking information distribution. The Kaminsky et al. application does not suggest a method, computer useable medium, and/or system for analyzing media exposure according to the claimed invention.
U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2002/0133817 A1, published on Sep. 19, 2002 for Steven O. Markel, describes affinity marketing for interactive media systems. The Markel application does not suggest a method, computer useable medium, and/or system for analyzing media exposure according to the claimed invention.
U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2002/0138630 A1, published on Sep. 26, 2002 for Barry M. Solomon et al., describes a music scheduling algorithm for programmatically and dynamically creating a unique play list for each listener of an Internet radio service. The Solomon et al. application does not suggest a method, computer useable medium, and/or system for analyzing media exposure according to the claimed invention.
U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2002/0124246 A1, published on Oct. 3, 2002 for Jay H. Connelly, describes a system and method for transparently obtaining customer preferences to refine product features or marketing focus. The Connelly application does not suggest a method, computer useable medium, and/or system for analyzing media exposure according to the claimed invention.
U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2002/0156684 A1, U.S. Pat No. 6,873,969 published on Oct. 24, 2002, and U.S. Pat. No. 6,446,045 B1, issued on Sep. 3, 2002, for Lucinda Stone et al., describe a method for using computers to facilitate and control the creating of a plurality of functions. The Stone et al. application does not suggest a method, computer useable medium, and/or system for analyzing media exposure according to the claimed invention.
U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2002/0161764 A1, published on Oct. 31, 2002 for Linda Sharo, describes a marketing management method and a system to manage interactions, develop base line for the current performance, analyze various marketing strategies, and select a desirable marketing strategy for implementation. The Sharo application does not suggest a method, computer useable medium, and/or system for analyzing media exposure according to the claimed invention.
U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2002/0184069 A1, published on Dec. 5, 2002 for Eric Kosiba et al., describes a system and method for predicting expected performance of a processing center. The Kosiba et al. application does not suggest a method, computer useable medium, and/or system for analyzing media exposure according to the claimed invention.
U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2002/0188746 A1, published on Dec. 12, 2002 for Joseph Drossett et al., describes a system and method for audience measurement. The Drossett et al. application does not suggest a method, computer useable medium, and/or system for analyzing media exposure according to the claimed invention.
U.S. Reexamination Certificate No. B1 4,745,468, and U.S. Pat. Nos. 4,876,592, 4,926,255, and 5,057,915, issued on Jun. 11, 1991, Oct. 24, 1989, May 15, 1990, and Oct. 15, 1991, respectively, to Henry Von Kohorn, describe a system for evaluating responses to broadcast programs. The Von Kohorn certificate and the Von Kohorn '592, '255, and 915 patents do not suggest a method, computer useable medium, and/or system for analyzing media exposure according to the claimed invention.
U.S. Pat. No. 4,816,904, issued on Mar. 28, 1989 to William J. McKenna et al., describes a television and market research data collection system and method. The McKenna et al. patent does not suggest a method, computer useable medium, and/or system for analyzing media exposure according to the claimed invention.
U.S. Pat. No. 5,227,874, issued on Jul. 13, 1993 to Henry Von Kohorn, describes a method for measuring the effectiveness of stimuli on the decisions of shoppers. The Von Kohorn '874 patent does not suggest a method, computer useable medium, and/or system for analyzing media exposure according to the claimed invention.
U.S. Pat. No. 5,913,204, issued on Jun. 15, 1999 to Thomas L. Kelly, describes a method and apparatus for surveying and reporting listener opinion of a list of songs. The Kelly patent does not suggest a method, computer useable medium, and/or system for analyzing media exposure according to the claimed invention.
U.S. Pat. No. 6,286,140 B1, issued on Sep. 4, 2001 to Thomas P. Ivanyi, describes a system and method for measuring and storing information pertaining to television viewer or user behavior. The Ivanyi patent does not suggest a method, computer useable medium, and/or system for analyzing media exposure according to the claimed invention.
U.S. Pat. No. 6,298,328 B1, issued on Oct. 8, 2001 to Eileen M. Healy et al., describes an apparatus, method, and system for sizing markets. The Healy et al. patent does not suggest a method, computer useable medium, and/or system for analyzing media exposure according to the claimed invention.
U.S. Pat. No. 6,415,291 B2, issued on Jul. 2, 2002 to W. Lincoln Bouve et al., describes a system and method for remotely accessing a selected group of items of interest from a database. The Bouve et al. patent does not suggest a method, computer useable medium, and/or system for analyzing media exposure according to the claimed invention.
Great Britain Patent Application Publication No. 1,287,304, published on Aug. 31, 1972, describes educational television systems. The Great Britain application does not suggest a method, computer useable medium, and/or system for analyzing media exposure according to the claimed invention.
World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) Patent Application Publication No. WO 01/80122 A2, published on Oct. 25, 2001, describes an interactive system for conducting business and a method for the interactive distribution of information relating to products and services. The WIPO application does not suggest a method, computer useable medium, and/or system for analyzing media exposure according to the claimed invention.
An Internet web page at http://www.v-soft.com/nbt/default.asp, printed on Dec. 18, 2002, shows a zip code query that results in a list of FM stations serving the area of the zip code. The v-soft web page does not suggest a method, computer useable medium, and/or system for analyzing media exposure according to the claimed invention.
An Internet web page at http://www.nielsenmedia.com/services.html, printed on Dec. 18, 2002, describes services of Nielsen Media Research. This Nielsen Media web page does not suggest a method, computer useable medium, and/or system for analyzing media exposure according to the claimed invention.
An Internet web page at http://www.nielson.com/nielsen_media_research.html, printed on Dec. 18, 2002, describes information about Nielsen Media Research. This Nielsen Media web page does not suggest a method, computer useable medium, and/or system for analyzing media exposure according to the claimed invention.
None of the above inventions and patents, taken either singularly or in combination, is seen to describe the instant invention as claimed.